South Africa no longer has an immigration policy. This is not a statement of criticism, but a jurisdictional fact. On 26 May 2014, when the Immigration Act was amended, an entirely new paradigm of immigration regulation came into operation, unprecedented in its inflexibility and in its exclusionism. This is not a phenomenon that suddenly appeared out of nothing, but it emerged from a history of administrative corruption, the violation of South Africa`s borders and Government`s frustrated response to it.
The foundations of Government`s frustration lie its realisation that perhaps 15-20% of South Africa`s permanent resident population are imposters. These are foreigners who misrepresented themselves as offspring of at least one South African citizen parent or who acquired permanent residence documents by fraud. It was a common practice for foreigners, mostly from neighboring countries, to falsely represent themselves by affidavit as the unregistered offspring of South African parents and thereby easily had their births registered with the Department of Home Affairs (DHA). More stringent protocols making these late birth registrations more difficult came much later. It was also common to acquire the right to permanent residence through misrepresentation, bribery and fabrication. These practices occurred when decision-making was decentralized to the provinces. Today these impersonators use South African identity documents and are accepted as native members of our population.
Added to this corroded landscape was the issue of false South African passports. The British government imposed visa requirements on South African passport holders in 2008 after concluding that our government could not adequately resolve the lapses in passport securitization. South Africa`s minister of Foreign Affairs who had borne the brunt of British dissatisfaction with the level of corruption within the DHA civic services directorate, responsible for passport processing and issuance, was Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma. When she became Minister of Home Affairs in 2008, she took it upon herself to eradicate that corruption and to restore law and order within the DHA. In May 2010, all decisions on immigration applications were centralized at DHA Headquarters in Pretoria and a security cordon began to be spun around that hub. Since the operational systems were not properly in place when the centralization project began between 60-70% of all applications submitted at DHA offices were lost and could never be traced. This trend continued into 2011.
With a flood of litigation ensued to resolve the paralysis, it became patently clear how deep rooted the administrative bungling was. By then the conservative "old-style" civil service had haemorrhaged from the DHA leaving in its vacuum a public administration largely uneducated and inexperience, which became a glaringly important deficit in light of more complicated regulations coming into force.
With the publication of the last amendments to the Immigration Act in 2011, it became blatantly clear that an immigration policy was beginning to rapidly evolve into a border security policy. The cost of heightened inefficiency within the DHA coupled with an increasingly intolerant administrative attitude began to encroach on foreigners like never before. This trend was reinforced by the DHA`s increased inclusion into the so-called security cluster, together with correctional services, state security and defense. With cadre deployment within the DHA, strip clubs were pursued with vengeance because human trafficking became a central focus of immigration control, distorting and replacing the DHA`s previous emphasis on the facilitation of entry of foreign workers, entrepreneurs and retirees.
On 22 May 2014, the amended Immigration Act with its regulations were published with a commencement date of 26 May, leaving the public with a single business days` notice to prepare for the extensive changes which the amendments brought into force. Once the new regime commenced, it was not until mid-June that applications could be submitted through VFS, contracted by the DHA to serve as its "front counter". The new system has little redeeming character, both in terms of substance and the manner in which the DHA has applied it.
These are some of its distinguishing characteristics: • It is no longer possible to engage directly with the DHA by placing before it immigration applications. At a substantially added expense, all foreigners are forced to submit their applications
| | and administrative appeals personally through VFS in South Africa, or at VFS and Consular offices internationally. The inconvenience and expense of personal applications, especially in Asia and Russia, has caused a loss of over R4.4 billion in tourism revenue;
• Foreigners, including foreign spouses of South Africans, can no longer apply for their visas in South Africa while on visitor visas;
• Foreigners can no longer apply for "general" work visas, or extensions of existing such visas, without obtaining the support from the Department of Labour (DOL). The problem persists that the DOL does not support the employment of foreigners and for this reason the general work visa category is largely paralyzed. While the productivity of South Africa`s labour force has dwindled to the lowest in 40 years, the DOL continues to protect the South African labour market from the entry of skilled foreigners, contributing to South Africa`s increasing un-competitiveness;
• The immigration system does not support work visas in the humanities (including chefs, teachers, lawyers, philosophers, political analysts, NGO and development consultants; business consultants; productivity analysts; business and production managers), or exceptionally skilled foreigners who do not have predetermined "critical skills``;
• Over 50% of all temporary and permanent residence immigration applications have been refused, many of which are compliant applications, forcing foreigners to appeal those adverse decisions when VFS charges for each submission R1350, and the DHA is delinquent in its lengthy delay in processing such appeals, up to 5-12 months rendering the appeals process nugatory. Foreigners awaiting the outcome of their applications or appeals after the expiry of their temporary residence visas cannot depart South Africa without being declared "undesirable" and prohibited from returning for up to 5 years. While these foreigners can appeal their undesirability such appeals are either denied or take up to 6 months to be adjudicated;
• The level of intellectual competence of consular officials at South Africa`s foreign missions is generally low, and at many missions attitudes of arrogance and xenophobia are frequently encountered (including Berlin, The Hague, Shanghai, Moscow, Harare, Nairobi);
• The immigration regulatory regime is too bureaucratic to entice foreign skills and entrepreneurs in the international competition for skills and foreign direct investment.
The Conference Board, an internationally respected research organization, has concluded that South Africa is experiencing negative GDP growth, together with Zimbabwe and Ghana, lagging dangerously behind all other Sub-Saharan economies. Professor Edmund Ferreira of UNISA has found that since 1967, "output per worker per unit of capital in South Africa has fallen from R7 297 to R4 924 a year – a decline of 32.5%. From its peak in 1993, this measure of labour productivity has fallen by 41.2%, bringing it down to the lowest level in 46 years. South Africa today is less efficient than many of its emerging market competitors, its labour force is uncompetitive and labour productivity is much lower than that of the rest of the developing world."
South Africa`s current immigration system blatantly protects South Africa`s labour market from immigrants on the assumption that foreigners are a threat to it. This protectionism is the product of South Africa`s political machinations, not empirical research. The overwhelming conclusion of current research confirms that immigrants do not crowd out domestic employment opportunities but add to employment. Moreover, immigration increases total factor productivity significantly.
South Africa`s border security policy is unsustainable because the costs of unimpeded productivity declines outweigh the gains from excluding foreigners. The sooner the Minister of Home Affairs realises that South Africa needs an immigration policy that is flexible and encourages the inflow of financially self-sufficient, entrepreneurial, and skilled immigrants the more likely South Africa will succeed to compete in the modern world. V.1452 |
One of the highlighted topics: Critical Skills Visa.
- Key Insight: Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast track to working in South Afr... - This matter relates to critical skills visa and its broader implications. - Individuals are advised to seek professional guidance.
Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast trac V.6139 Click here for full article | | One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, became a victim of identity theft in 2012 when fraudulent transactions occurred, using her personal details.
-The Pretoria High Court found that the department of home affairs had violated constitutional rights without due process. -Only half of Lawyers for Human Rights` test group has been unblocked, while 385 000 identities remain blocked nationwide. -LHR appeals extension, urges affected people to seek help now.
Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) are intensifying pressure on the department of home affairs over the national ID-blocking crisis, accusing the state of acting too slowly to unblock qualifying individuals despite a landmark court ruling.
In January last year, the Pretoria High Court found that the department`s practice of blocking IDs without due process was unlawful and unconstitutional. One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, a Swati citizen and South African permanent resident since 1998, fell victim to identity theft in 2012 when fraudsters used her personal details.
V.6133 Click here for full article |
A Washington state mother and her 6-year-old son have been released after spending more than three weeks in US immigration detention due to a brief trip to Canada and a small paperwork mistake, her attorney told CNN on Saturday.
Sarah Shaw, a New Zealand citizen who has lived legally in the US since she arrived in 2021, was detained at the Blaine, Washington, Customs and Border Protection checkpoint when returning home after dropping her two oldest children off at the Vancouver airport for a flight to visit their grandparents in New Zealand. Shaw, 33, chose the flight out of Vancouver because it was direct and she didn`t want her children to have to navigate a layover alone, her attorney Minda Thorward, told CNN.
V.6130 Click here for full article | | On 22 July 2025, the Gauteng High Court dismissed Sitrusrand Boerdery`s review of the Department of Employment and Labour`s refusal to issue a Working Conditions and Salary Benchmarking Certificate, an essential precondition for obtaining corporate visas under the Immigration Act.
Acting Judge Kekana AJ held that the Department`s decision was lawful, rational and procedurally fair. This judgment illustrates how businesses can - and must - structure their corporate visa applications to meet statutory requirements, and how legal practitioners should prepare robust review challenges when administrative authorities decline to recommend foreign-work permits.
V.6131 Click here for full article |
The United States could forfeit an estimated 9.4 billion dollars in visitor spending over the next three years following the introduction of a new 250 dollars `visa integrity fee,` according to industry groups, who warn the policy risks undermining tourism and costing thousands of jobs. The United Statesâ decision to introduce a 250 dollars `visa integrity fee` on international visitors has triggered sharp criticism from the global tourism industry, with officials warning that the measure could deter millions of travellers and cost the U.S. economy billions. The 250dollar `visa integrity fee,` part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed on July 4, 2025, will take effect later this year. According to immigration law firm Envoy Global, it applies to all nonimmigrant visa holders which include students, tourists, temporary workers, and business visitors particularly from African countries. V.6132 Click here for full article | | The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.
What does this mean for travelers? V.6127 Click here for full article |
1. Right to Legal Representationâ¢You have the right to consult with a legal representative.â¢Contact an immigration practitioner, legal aid clinic, or attorney urgently.â¢Do not sign any documents without understanding them fully. 2. Section 34 of the Immigration Actâ¢You must be brought to court with 48 hours to confirm arrest but you can remain locked up very long as courts figure out what to do with you â¢If you`re found to be illegally in South Africa, you may be detained for up to 30 days (extendable by a magistrate) pending deportation.â¢BUT this cannot happen arbitrarily. You must be informed of your rights, and Home Affairs must follow due process.- becomes a nightmare , you could lose your job , business , place to stay V.6121 Click here for full article | | Driving for Bolt, Uber, Mr D, or Checkers Sixty60?If you`re undocumented, you`re risking more than just your income.The Risks if You`re Not Legal: - Vehicle impoundment - Heavy fines - Arrest & deportation - Permanent bans from working in SA V.6122 Click here for full article |